regenerate bootstrap files without arch-native

[geekosaur]

Template B: This PR does not modify behaviour or interface

E.g. the PR only touches documentation or tests, does refactorings, etc.

Include the following checklist in your PR:

• Patches conform to the coding conventions.
• Is this a PR that fixes CI? If so, it will need to be backported to older cabal release branches (ask maintainers for directions).

[geekosaur]

@mergify backport master

[mergify]

backport master

✅ Backports have been created

• #10150 regenerate bootstrap files without arch-native (backport #10148) has been created for branch master but encountered conflicts

[TerrorJack]

Would automatic forward port work properly for master? Since master additionally contains 8.10.7 plan which doesn't seem to be in 3.12 branch

[geekosaur]

I think it's officially no longer supported for bootstrapping? Not sure how it's still on master; we've had some glitches due to conflicting changes to bootstrap-related things. @Mikolaj / @ulysses4ever ?

[Mikolaj]

I think it's fine to just delete the old bootstrap on master as a manual additional change to the forward port. We may have removed the old bootstrap with @ffaf1 (did we?) when releasing 3.12.0.0 in order to conserve our sanity. A couple of GHC versions is enough for bootstrapping (and we can generate more if users need them and tell us), so this old one can go.

[geekosaur]

Reminder, since the Mergify rules update hasn't been merged yet, this will need to be manually merged. The label's just for the record.

[geekosaur]

Huh. I wish mergify would be consistent about whether it's going to merge or not.

[ffaf1]

We may have removed the old bootstrap with @ffaf1 (did we?) when releasing 3.12.0.0 in order to conserve our sanity.

We did.